New development planned in Cook St Village. From the looks of it, the plans are for a 5 floor residential condo building with ground floor commercial/retail. Will involved demolishing the two SFH and two small apartment buildings at Cook and Oliphant. Hope the plans are nice! Could be a nice extension to the retail offerings of Cook St Village. Hope the plans are good!

New development planned in Cook St Village. From the looks of it, the plans are for a 5 floor residential condo building with ground floor commercial/retail. Will involved demolishing the two SFH and two small apartment buildings at Cook and Oliphant. Hope the plans are nice! Could be a nice extension to the retail offerings of Cook St Village. Hope the plans are good!

Wow. That's one brave developer. This has the potential to be a bloodbath almost as bad as the Mason St. project...at least there are no farms or urban chickens on Cook Street, right?

This is absolutely the right idea and density for Cook St Village though. The two newer buildings down there have been fantastic additions.

It's south enough in the Village that maybe it'll be less controversial than the last one.

Hopefully the local yokel's remember that fantastic local businesses such as Bubby's Kitchen, Paws on Cook, Mother's Nature groceries, Rainbird Apparel and Prima Strada now have homes in the village thanks to the two newer developments that were controversial back in the day.

Not keen on the loss of rental to condo, but otherwise good. The City forced the Abstract folks for the Village building to provide 1:1 replacement of rental stock, which I personally think is a good starting place.

I'd wager there are 20-25 housing units currently on site. It shouldn't be hard to increase the number of housing units overall if the plan does ahead with all four floors of residential.

Not keen on the loss of rental to condo, but otherwise good. The City forced the Abstract folks for the Village building to provide 1:1 replacement of rental stock, which I personally think is a good starting place.

How does the city enforce this to make sure that those rentals actually materialize? I don't think that is a bad idea.

Not keen on the loss of rental to condo, but otherwise good. The City forced the Abstract folks for the Village building to provide 1:1 replacement of rental stock, which I personally think is a good starting place.

This may be a rental, afawk. The strata component could be related to the commercial space, perhaps?

Know it all.Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.

This may be a rental, afawk. The strata component could be related to the commercial space, perhaps?

Huh? It's either all strata or none. You can't have strata units below purpose-built rental units. You could have strata apartments that you agree to covenant as rental-only (not for sale) for some period of time.

Huh? It's either all strata or none. You can't have strata units below purpose-built rental units. You could have strata apartments that you agree to covenant as rental-only (not for sale) for some period of time.

Surely that happens? There are mixed market and rental residential buildings. Hudson Mews was to have 20 market units above the rentals and there are mixed-use market residential, office and commercial buildings. Perhaps technically there are the covenants VHF mentions but that's more of a formality than an impediment to having rentals.

Know it all.Citified.ca is Victoria's most comprehensive research resource for new-build homes and commercial spaces.